Topic: Working with a stack recording

[Steve J]

I'm processing a recording I made. It was a street festival with the SBD area to the right, almost directly in the path of the stack on that side. For one reason or another, I had to set up the mics at the front of the SBD area...recording essentially a stack tape. I recorded each mic/line source to its own mono track to be mixed later; and basically put away the recordings when I finished (didn't review at all).

So, finally sitting down to mix, I'm not really thrilled with the lack of stereo image I got with the mics. I've played around shifting one of the tracks about 5-10 ms, to get a bit of "chorus" effect. Seems to add a bit of life to the recording (at least to my ears). I'm wondering whether to use the original image (warts and all) or proceed with delay added.

Thoughts?

[shruggy1987]

if you can find software with a stereo expander, that would help the dynamics of a plain-ish sounding recording.

[Steve J]

Oh, I have the software; but what I was seeking views on the ethics (for the lack of a better word) of making such alterations. When does the recordist become a producer, so to speak?

[SuperDave]

Oh, I have the software; but what I was seeking views on the ethics (for the lack of a better word) of making such alterations. When does the recordist become a producer, so to speak?

I'd say do whatever you want to it to make it listenable to your ears if it's only for your listening.  If you're gonna share it though, let it be.  And if you do alter it, make sure to document what you've done.

Good luck!   

[aberg]

I think you're free to do whatever you want with it. In my books there aren't really these "so-called" ethics of taping in terms of how to release a show. I agree that you should document what you did, but feel free to alter it as you wish, if you think it improves the sound quality. If people complain, screw 'em... there are too many purists around here anyways! 

[cleantone]

I say do whatever you want to your recording. If it were someone elses that you d/l or patched then maybe you would want to tread lightly but if it is all yours, it's up to you. I know my goal is to make the best sounding recording I can. I'll do what it take within my abilities to make that happen.

[shruggy1987]

I say do whatever you want to your recording. If it were someone elses that you d/l or patched then maybe you would want to tread lightly but if it is all yours, it's up to you. I know my goal is to make the best sounding recording I can. I'll do what it take within my abilities to make that happen.

I think that editing other people's recordings is a completely legitimate practice.  If they are putting it out there to be spread to the masses, surely they wouldn't mind it if you wanted to improve the sound!  The original recordist should be thankful (given that you know what you are doing).  I would say at most you should let the original recordist know what you are doing and you should send them freebies of what you've done when you finish.

[Brian Skalinder]

I think that editing other people's recordings is a completely legitimate practice.  If they are putting it out there to be spread to the masses, surely they wouldn't mind it if you wanted to improve the sound!  The original recordist should be thankful (given that you know what you are doing).

And therein lies the rub - IME the vast majority of people who edit others' recordings don't know what they're doing, don't have the appropriate tools, or playback system, or experience, even if they think they have the ears.

[shruggy1987]

A good friend of mine who has 30+ years of technical audio experience did work with Sanjay's phil lesh in Buffalo recording from the fall tour.  I remember one of the comments on the torrent was that Sanjay usually didn't like his work to be messed with because it usually implied some teenager playing around in Audacity with dell laptop speakers, but in this case, he didn't mind because the guy seemed to know what he was doing-which I can definitely verify...and if you listen to the new source: your ears will not lie. 

[Chuck]

I think that editing other people's recordings is a completely legitimate practice.  If they are putting it out there to be spread to the masses, surely they wouldn't mind it if you wanted to improve the sound!  The original recordist should be thankful (given that you know what you are doing).

And therein lies the rub - IME the vast majority of people who edit others' recordings don't know what they're doing, don't have the appropriate tools, or playback system, or experience, even if they think they have the ears.

I agree with you Brian. I'd say at least let the taper know about the "re-mastering" before re-seeding it.

My feeling is if you want to download a show and do your own magic on it, great! But, don't just re-seed it. If you think it's a masterpiece after you do your stuff, give a copy to the taper to see what he/she thinks.

Lots of us download recordings to hear what a particular combination of gear sounds like. "Remastering" a recording makes this harder to do.

YMMV